And that's why

Yea one hill I’m willing to die on as far as changes from this season to next is that on any possible double headers... skip the inversion. I’m not even acting like it’s affecting who I pull for... I’m speaking for all... I really dislike the inversion stuff.
 
JGR_20 said:
Yea one hill I’m willing to die on as far as changes from this season to next is that on any possible double headers... skip the inversion. I’m not even acting like it’s affecting who I pull for... I’m speaking for all... I really dislike the inversion stuff.
Click to expand...
WHY?? Back in the day (not nascar) they inverted the whole field. 1st place points started dad last and still got a top 5. Fun to watch.
 
Team Penske said:
WHY?? Back in the day (not nascar) they inverted the whole field. 1st place points started dad last and still got a top 5. Fun to watch.
Click to expand...
Because the inversion often creates the situation we had today. The drivers most often people watch the race to see......get taken out of contention early in the race. And the single driver fan clicks off the race. Not good for NASCAR.
 
Team Penske said:
WHY?? Back in the day (not nascar) they inverted the whole field. 1st place points started dad last and still got a top 5. Fun to watch.
Click to expand...

I’m not saying it’s not been done before or other racing series’ don’t use the methods. Maybe a lot of people dig it... I personally feel like it punishes the drivers and teams who were fast in the first race... I don’t need to see the next race ‘spiced’ up by starting the winner in the mid pack...

If there cannot be time trials... and believe me I understand the circumstances as does everyone today, then start the drivers based on how they finished the first race of the double header...

NASCAR is rewarding the drivers who finish up front by using it along with points position which ties into the same idea... basically the drivers and teams are rewarded the rest of the season for performing well, until a double header race comes along.

That’s why I personally am not a fan.
 
ahudsonman said:
Because the inversion often creates the situation we had today. The drivers most often people watch the race to see......get taken out of contention early in the race. And the single driver fan clicks off the race. Not good for NASCAR.
Click to expand...



Nascar was always fine, and then they began to tinker
 
ahudsonman said:
Because the inversion often creates the situation we had today. The drivers most often people watch the race to see......get taken out of contention early in the race. And the single driver fan clicks off the race. Not good for NASCAR.
Click to expand...
Oh please, “single driver fans” have been turning the race off when their driver wrecks out for decades. The inversions did not start this. Unlike every other major sport, motorsports fans generally pull the most for one or two drivers. If they get sent home, thats just racing. Unlike say football if a player gets injured or benched, the entire team still plays on.
 
The wreck could easily have occurred at the front of the field after 3 practices and a qualifying session put the usual suspects in their usual starting places.

Racing is dynamic ... constantly changing as the laps play out. This week’s outcome-altering blasphemy is drowned out next week by the sound of a siren shrieking from the pool hall in Dawsonville, Georgia.

We’re pretty lucky our sport is doing as well as it is.
 
I'd do away with the invert if I were king. I think they add little more to the race than a little bit of manufactured excitement in the first 3rd of the race.
With that said, I'm not passionate about it and no one really cares what I think.
But let's be honest, if chase wasn't exceptional on road courses, there would be much less passion for them. Human nature always wants what's best for them, if your driver finished 20th in the first race, you probably love the invert that weekend.
 
It’s a bit goofy but I don’t really mind it besides the fact it has a big influence on points for the first stage. I find the grid-setting formula good and wouldn’t mind if they used that but we don’t have any more doubles to deal with this year at least so moot point.
 
Inversion only works when the entire field is affected as one unit rather than in groups. I not a fan of it overall but I think I prefer it with no qualifying
 
ChexOrWrex said:
Oh please, “single driver fans” have been turning the race off when their driver wrecks out for decades. The inversions did not start this. Unlike every other major sport, motorsports fans generally pull the most for one or two drivers. If they get sent home, thats just racing. Unlike say football if a player gets injured or benched, the entire team still plays on.
Click to expand...
When Dale Jr would crash out of a race, a quarter of the stands would empty
 
ahudsonman said:
Because the inversion often creates the situation we had today. The drivers most often people watch the race to see......get taken out of contention early in the race. And the single driver fan clicks off the race. Not good for NASCAR.
Click to expand...
WHEN I was racing in the mid 60's, if I drove like some of those young idiots do today,
you were taught a lesson. Mind you back then you were also the owner and the bill payer
so you learned to be respectful or you had lots of money to waste.
Blocking when your laps down usually ended your career.
 
JGR_20 said:
I’m not saying it’s not been done before or other racing series’ don’t use the methods. Maybe a lot of people dig it... I personally feel like it punishes the drivers and teams who were fast in the first race... I don’t need to see the next race ‘spiced’ up by starting the winner in the mid pack...

If there cannot be time trials... and believe me I understand the circumstances as does everyone today, then start the drivers based on how they finished the first race of the double header...

NASCAR is rewarding the drivers who finish up front by using it along with points position which ties into the same idea... basically the drivers and teams are rewarded the rest of the season for performing well, until a double header race comes along.

That’s why I personally am not a fan.
Click to expand...
If the front cars are always the fast cars why even bother running 40 cars?? Just cut the playoffs to 5 cars and cut the field to 12.
Winning the race then starting 20th should be entertaining as it was yesterday. Besides it gives the camera people something to do besides follow the lead cars.
 
If they are going to invert....invert...the entire field, not just partial.
 
aunty dive said:
The wreck could easily have occurred at the front of the field after 3 practices and a qualifying session put the usual suspects in their usual starting places.

Racing is dynamic ... constantly changing as the laps play out. This week’s outcome-altering blasphemy is drowned out next week by the sound of a siren shrieking from the pool hall in Dawsonville, Georgia.

We’re pretty lucky our sport is doing as well as it is.
Click to expand...

Sometimes there is a post that just nails it. This is that one.
 
I don't care how they line up when the green rag drops the BS stops.
No worries #9 fans the newly adopted super wazoo abacus line up procedure will start RNJ2.0 near the front next Saturday.
 
If memory serves, young Master Logano has screwed up at the front, in the middle and at the tail end of the pack on this or that date. So has everybody else.

 
Team Penske said:
WHY?? Back in the day (not nascar) they inverted the whole field. 1st place points started dad last and still got a top 5. Fun to watch.
Click to expand...
Here's how you can tell inversion is a gimmick - because they only do it on the double-header weekends. If this was a good idea, they start every race by inverting the field from the previous race. If Dover's second race was weeks after the first, as it usually is, the starting line-up would have been set the same way as the races on the weekends before and after it was run.

Since they only do it when the races are on consecutive days, it's a gimmick.
 
Last edited:
Charlie Spencer said:
Here's how you can tell inversion is a gimmick - because they only do it on the double-header weekends. If this was a good idea, they start every race by inverting the field from the previous race. If Dover's second race was weeks after the first, as it usually is, the starting line-up would have been set the same way as the races on the weekends before and after it was run.

Since they only do it when the races are on consecutive days, it's a gimmick.
Click to expand...
It's not a gimmick. Thanks for the Barney Fife though.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
Here's how you can tell inversion is a gimmick - because they only do it on the double-header weekends. If this was a good idea, they start every race by inverting the field from the previous race. If Dover's second race was weeks after the first, as it usually is, the starting line-up would have been set the same way as the races on the weekends before and after it was run.

Since they only do it when the races are on consecutive days, it's a gimmick.
Click to expand...
I can agree with that 100%. Keep it consistent no matter the system.
 
I knew when I posted Pockrass's tweet before anything happened that wreck or not there will always be "that group" :laugh: If it didn't involve Elliott the last invert of the year, all of the invert races would have passed mostly without notice. There has been talk for years from fans thinking that inverting the field would be a good idea. I think they answered that question.
 
ToyYoda said:
And a lot of Dale Jr fans became Chase Elliott fans, so probably a fair amount of tune-outs yesterday early on.
Click to expand...
I'm guilty of it. I turned back to Indy 500 then checked near end of Dover for quick update. Saw what I expected to, and tuned out.
 
StandOnIt said:
I knew when I posted Pockrass's tweet before anything happened that wreck or not there will always be "that group" :laugh: If it didn't involve Elliott the last invert of the year, all of the invert races would have passed mostly without notice. There has been talk for years from fans thinking that inverting the field would be a good idea. I think they answered that question.
Click to expand...
I'm not an Elliott fan, and I have no objection to inversions in general. My objection is strictly to the inconsistency of its use. Why does the second race of a weekend require a different method of setting the lineup than the first race of the weekend, or of the race the following weekend?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom